Investigators found there were no differences in midterm outcomes in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty with a mini-incision posterior approach and patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty with a two-incision approach.
Craig J. Della Valle
“Based on our results, there does not seem to be a difference in the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty based on the surgical approach. Both groups in this series did well,” Craig J. Della Valle, MD, study co-author, professor of orthopedic surgery and chief of the division of adult reconstructive surgery at Rush University Medical Center, told Healio.com/Orthopedics. “While the two-incision approach is no longer utilized widely, it is similar the direct anterior approach.”
Della Valle and colleagues identified 72 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty. Patients were randomized to undergo a mini-incision posterior approach or a two-incision approach. Investigators compared complications, revisions and clinical outcome measures. Radiographs were evaluated for implant loosening. The minimum follow-up was 5 years.
At a mean of 8.2 years, investigators found six patients died and did not have revision surgery. Of the 66 living patients, 63 were reviewed. Investigators noted a total of six failures, three occurring in mini-incision posterior approach group and three in the two-incision approach group. There were no significant differences between the mini-incision posterior approach group and the two-incision approach group for patients who did not need revision surgery with regard to the Harris Hip score, SF-12 physical and mental component scores, and single assessment numeric evaluation score. – by Monica Jaramillo
Disclosure: Della Valle reports he receives royalties, research support from and does consulting for Zimmer Biomet; is a paid researcher for Stryker; does consulting for and is a paid researcher for Smith & Nephew; and does consulting for DePuy.